testing

testing, 4 months ago

@ernest thank you for all the work you have dedicated to kbin!

i wish you are getting all support needed right now!

testing, 5 months ago

@ThatOneKirbyMain2568
given the sheer size of threads, most fedi platforms still lack well-developed moderation tools > this is a tough nut to crack, thus preemptive defederation is a must when it comes to threads

testing, 4 months ago

from the interview:

In June 1975, Indira Gandhi, the third Prime Minister of India, imposed a State of Emergency throughout the country in response to what she called a “conspiracy” against her. Convicted of corruption and threatened by a growing opposition and mass demonstrations, Gandhi acted ruthlessly. Basic civil liberties were suspended, thousands were detained without trial, censorship imposed, and corruption reached new heights. Surprisingly lifted after twenty months, the Emergency became an anomaly in India’s democratic history—and was all but forgotten for many years, except, significantly, from literary fiction.

Refracted in the pandemic emergency, it became clearer in my study that emergencies worldwide are not only similar to past emergencies, but that they are constructed on a template of “emergency”: a structure within which an emergency could be comprehended despite its ostensible singularity. In other words, emergencies are unprecedented, but need to be recognizably so.

Building on existing scholarship, I argue, for example, that the neither-left-nor-right opposition to the Emergency was pivotal in legitimizing the fringe elements of this Hindu right, paving the way to the rise of today’s BJP government. I also show how the mass forced sterilization campaign, which is often seen as emblematic of the Emergency, was in fact a continuation of a long-standing globally-funded project of population control. Relatedly, the Emergency was central to family and class politics in India, revealing that there were individual elite families that need to be guarded and preserved and lower-class families of populations that need to be limited and curtailed.

The question of unprecedented political emergencies brings us to our present crisis in Israel/Gaza. I wish to speak about it with care, both because it is ongoing and shifting all the time, and because I speak of it from a very personal and very painful place. As an Israeli, I am in anguish about the people and places decimated by Hamas’ attack on October 7. At the same time, I am paralyzed by my feelings of shame and complicity in the senseless carnage that Israeli has unleashed on Gaza.

The current deadly violence is not, in fact, either a singular moment of crisis, nor an inevitable result of a two-sided “conflict” in which we must line up to take sides. It is deeply embedded in a complex historical context, inextricable from occupation of Palestinians by Israel, with its attendant apartheid regime and ethnic cleansing.

#india #emergency #corruption #colonialism #civilLiberties #israel #palestine #gaza #war #militarization #violence #histodons

testing, 5 months ago

from the article:

The idea is that governments or companies of polluting countries offer to protect or restore land in countries with ample natural assets like forests and mangroves. The local people get a share in the profits, they may even be employed to work on the project. And in exchange, all the polluter asks is that they are allowed to go on polluting. After all, the forest they have paid for can absorb the pollution they are creating. This concept is called ‘offsetting’.
Huge swathes of forests in African countries have been bought up for carbon credits by the United Arab Emirates. China is funding mangrove restoration in Indonesia for carbon credits. Just this week Singapore and Fiji have just announced a memorandum of understanding to collaborate on carbon markets, describing this as “a critical tool to advancing global climate action to meet the goals of the Paris Agreement”. Papua New Guinea and Timor Leste are readying themselves for an appropriate wealthy suitor to make an offer.
If it sounds too good to be true, perhaps that it is because it is. There are significant risks posed by carbon trading arrangements and Pacific communities should be sceptical before they believe the promises being made by carbon trading advocates.
One reason is the dubious claims being made about the role of carbon offsets in the fight against climate change. Companies, lobbyists, and governments claim carbon trading can combat climate catastrophe.
But a body of research shows carbon trading schemes have been counterproductive – with fake or overstated offsets increasing global emissions. An international investigation found that up to 90 per cent of carbon credits sold under the main voluntary carbon market scheme are worthless and do nothing for the climate.
Richer nations and businesses are also using carbon trading to justify a massive fossil fuel expansion. This will accelerate global warming and sea level rises that threaten Pacific nations. Climate change will wipe out the forests and mangroves that have apparently been ‘saved’.
Climate scientists, the UN, and the International Energy Agency say that to have any hope of avoiding a climate disaster, the world must stop approving new fossil fuel projects.

Unfortunately, carbon markets have a long history of dubious operators. This is not a new concept as many suggest. Carbon markets have been around for decades and there is a vast body of researching showing that, globally, companies running carbon offset schemes have failed to adequately consult with customary landowners, operated with no legal basis, or disappointed locals’ expectations by siphoning off money to financial go-betweens and project developers.

It would be far better if the global community recognised the role Pacific communities play as custodians and guardians of the forests and rewarded them for this through direct finance – instead of encouraging Pacific countries to monetise their carbon sinks so more destructive fossil fuel projects can go ahead.